BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.297/2018

DATED ON THIS THE 30^th November 2018

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

                     2) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                   

                                                B.E., LLB., PGDCLP   - MEMBER

Sri. Devakumar,M.C.                           

Member

1.     The complainant filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act 1986, against the opposite party, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and seeking a direction to allot a site and execute a registered sale deed in his favour, in their layout by name Athmananda Sagara and to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- for the inordinate delay in allotment and to pay Rs.25,000/- towards cost of the proceedings and to pay Rs.5,00,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony, hardship and inconvenience and to pay penalty to the legal aid of the Forum, with such other reliefs.
2.     The complainant deposited a total sum of Rs.3,93,600/- with opposite party, intending to purchase a residential site, measuring 40 x 60 ft. to be developed by opposite party, in their Athmananda Sagara layout.
3.     Opposite party assured to develop the layout and execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant, within 18 months from the date of deposit.  On repeated demands, the opposite party assured to allot a site and execute registered sale deed by June 2018, but failed.  The legal notice dated 02.08.2018 was also not replied.  Hence, the aggrieved alleged deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by opposite party and filed the complaint seeking reliefs.
4.     Opposite party remained absent, hence placed exparte.
5.     The complainant lead evidence by filing affidavit and relied on several documents to establish his case. Written arguments filed and the counsel submitted the oral arguments.  Perusing the material on record, matter posted for orders.  
6.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complainant establish the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by opposite party for not allotting a site and to execute the registered sale deed in his favour and thereby he is entitled for the reliefs sought?
2. What order?

7.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.2 :- As per final order, for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

8.    Point No.1:- The complainant obtained membership with opposite party by depositing Rs.1,020/- and intending to purchase a residential site measuring 40 x 60 ft. situated in opposite party’s Athmananda Sagara Layout, paid a total sum of Rs.3,93,600/- between 02.08.2007 and 21.04.2010.  The payments were acknowledged through receipts by opposite party.
9.    While accepting the sital consideration, the opposite party assured that, the layout would be developed and the registered sale deed would be executed in favour of the complainant, with respect to the site, within 18 months.  However, the opposite party failed to allot a site, despite of several reminders.  The opposite party had promised to execute the sale deed by June 2018, but failed till date of filing the complaint.  The complainant learnt that, the opposite party had allotted sites to other members and executed sale deed by pick and choosing the members.  A legal notice was caused by complainant on 02.08.2018, expressing his readiness to pay the balance consideration and to get execute the sale deed in his favour, which was neither replied nor complied by opposite party.  Aggrieved with the delay in allotment and execution of sale deed in his favour, complainant suffered mental agony, hardship and alleged the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by opposite party, hence filed the complaint and sought for the reliefs. 
10. Considering the material on record, the complainant established that, he had deposited a total sum of Rs.3,93,600/- towards allotment of a residential site measuring 40 x 60 ft. situated in opposite party’s Athmananda Sagara layout.  However, the opposite party failed to allot a site as promised, though the complainant was ready and willing to get execute the sale deed, by depositing the balance sale consideration.  In view of the same, we opine the opposite party had committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice towards the complainant and also caused mental agony, hardship.   Accordingly, the point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative.
11. Point No.2:- In view of the above observations, the complaint is to be allowed in part and the opposite party is to allot a site measuring 40 x 60 ft., in their “Athmananda Sagara Layout”, by accepting the balance sale consideration and to execute the registered sale deed in favour of the complainant, apart from payment of compensation for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.  Hence, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The opposite party is hereby directed to allot a site measuring 40 x 60 ft. developed in their “Athmananda Sagar Layout”, in favour of the complainant by collecting the balance sale consideration and to execute the registered sale deed, within 30 days of this order.  In default, opposite party to pay penalty of Rs.100/- per day until compliance.
3. The opposite party shall pay compensation of Rs.75,000/- for the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and Rs.10,000/- for causing mental agony, hardship and Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the proceedings, to the complainant in 30 days of this order.   Failing to pay, opposite party shall pay interest at 12% p.a. on the said total sum of Rs.90,000/- till payment.
4. The opposite party is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- toward Consumer Legal Aid Account in 30 days of this order.
5. In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party to undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
6. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 30^th November 2018)